UPDATE 3: Rand Paul Explains NDAA Vote & Justin Amash Responds

I have noticed that many are confused by my vote for NDAA. Please allow me to explain.

First, we should be clear about what the bill is. NDAA is the yearly defense authorization bill. It’s primary function is to specify which programs can and can't be funded within the Pentagon and throughout the military. It is not the bill that spends the money—that comes later in an appropriations bill.

Because I think we should spend less, I will offer amendments to cut spending. I will likely vote against the final spending bill. This wasn't it.

This bill also isn’t about indefinite detention. This year's bill did not contain the authorization for indefinite detention.

That provision was in last year's NDAA bill.

The bill this year contained the amendment I supported which sharply limited the detention power, and eliminated it entirely for American citizens in the US. While it is only a partial victory, it was a big victory. Particularly compared to what passed last year. Even so, I will continue to fight to protect anyone who could possibly be indefinitely detained.

I would never vote for any bill, anywhere, that I believed enhanced the government's power to abridge your rights and detain people. This goes against every principle I hold dear and the Constitution I took an oath to uphold and protect.

Government power and the many associated abuses have been piling up for years. We will not win all our liberties back at once. But we did win one battle this year, and we should be pleased that we did while also realizing the fight is really just getting started.

Senator Rand Paul is correct in his description of the 2013 NDAA. It's the 2012 NDAA (not 2013) that authorizes indefinite detention without charge or trial. There's much more to be done to protect our rights and undo the harm of the 2012 NDAA (which doesn't expire), but thanks to the efforts of United States Senator Mike Lee and Sen. Paul, we are making significant progress in (re-)advancing the principle that all people in the United States have a constitutionally protected right to full due process.

I asked him this question: "Would the Feinstein-Lee amendment that Sen. Paul voted for be sufficient for this 2013 NDAA? I know you had come out against this amendment initially, so was curious what you would say about that?"

Rep. Amash answered with: "Qadoshyah, I believe we need more than the Feinstein amendment. I understand their logic, but I disagree that it is sufficient because I have a different interpretation of the 2012 NDAA. They still made significant progress in advancing the cause and putting some protections in law."

People need to understand the way he votes. Any inch for our movement gets us closer to where we need to be. The NDAA contains an amendment that puts us closer. Rand fought for this amendment. Sure, the rest of the bill sucks but it was going to pass either way so why not toss us a bone while? I think it will be interesting to see what else comes from him. But people need to understand where he is coming from when he votes. He can't change everything over night.

I will NOT dishonor those who sacrificed their lives, fortunes and sacred honor protecting the Bill of Rights by supporting ANY candidate who compromises those rights. Nothing would please me more than to see George W. Bush, Barack Obama, the Bush and Obama's national security teams, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and EVERY Senator and House member who voted for "kill lists" and "indefinite detention" standing on a gallows quaking in their boots. I just wish I had the health and "special skills" to make that happen; but I will not shirk from responsibility to speak up for fear of my own safety.

Rand Paul enthusiastically endorsed Romney, who not only enthusiastically embraced "kill lists" and "indefinite detention," he hired thugs to bribe, defraud, intimidate, kidnap and even physically assault Ron Paul supporters, who, at their own personal sacrifice, stood up for liberty and the rule of law. Had ANY of Romney's thugs done that to me, I would have put them in body bags and then I would have gone after the man that paid them.

Call me an "extremist," if you like, you Rand supporting cowards. I can live or die with my "extremism". Can you live with your cowardice?

Extremist? Extremley useless is more like it. I'm glad you can be full of self worth when they toss you and the 10 other libertarian party members into a FEMA camp. Because if the liberty movement was in your hands, that's where it would end. I wonder how many angels like you couldn't be bothered to fight in the revolution because our founding fathers just weren't pure enough for them?

After all, hit- and-run sneaky attacks rather than honorably standing in a line and getting gunned down? Dishonorable!

Allying with the French against a common enemy!? A complete breach of principals! The French weren't true libertarians!!

Get useful to the cause or get lost. We don't need a bunch of pointless purist-day dreamers getting in the way of our counter revolution.

A shill? No, I was a delegate... Now i am a PCO who just helped take over my district GOP from a bunch of Neocons. We now control the chair and treasurer positions, a large portion of the PCO positions and have brought enough of the Neocons to our side that we will have the votes to put up 3 RP Repubs as the choices for our state rep.

What have you done for the cause of liberty other than spot all the traitors like me and Rand Paul?

I was not fortunate to be a delegate. Prior to primaries I worked my a&& off in every way possible, thousands of literature prepared and distributed, in my state as well as neighboring. I created delegate slips and distributed to other precinct workers in all of my Congressional District. I worked morning until night at two of the largest precincts in my county, all 3 of Ron Paul delegates won hands down. I have created a movie DVD and coordinated mailing them out, along with comparison sheet and dear delegate letter, to all delegates going to Tampa (thank you to those who have helped). I went to Tampa on my dime and assisted rides and other things.

I am now involved in Campaign for Liberty, attend committee meetings, and others, and have brought people into our movement.

I applaud your efforts and wish you well. But to question what I have done and continue to do for this movement will be pointless. FYI: Being heavily involved in this process nationwide, I discovered Ron Paul delegates who were stealth for mitt/rick; one in Ohio, one in Kentucky, and two in WV. I called them out and informed the true RP delegates.

So, you see where we are at an empass.

My goal is to convince people to vote based upon record after a FULL vetting process, and NOT some popularity contest. I have been working on comparison sheets and will provide them when done. But it seems that people here are not interested in debate to select the best Liberty, Freedom, candidate possible and have already made up their minds. Ron Paul has not even begun his speaking tour yet.

Ha. What a tool. Do dipshits like you just sit around in bunkers being angry, useless and jumping at your own shadow?
News flash asshole, we are on the same side, it's just I am gaining ground and replacing neocons with libertarians in positions of power and influence throughout my district, and you are making everyone who comes into contact with you believe that libertarians are hostile lunitics. My advise, there are probably considerably less Romney plants among us than you likely believe... Your children probably have not been replaced by Romney cyborg infiltration bots, and your soup has not been poisoned.

But then again... Maybe I "am" actually an eveal Romney infiltrator, hellbent on destroying freedom! Muhuhaaa! Yes, all of the PCOs in my district are RP alright... Romney/Paul Ryan! Fools!! Yes we've taken over the establishment repubs with.... More establishment repubs posing as libertarians, and soon the mothership will arrive! I would have got away with it to if it wasn't for your Amazing ability to tell friend from foe.

Also don't be so naive.. of course Romney people were here.. some of them even said so as well as a few progressives that frequent the board too.. What? You think DP is firewalled against socialism? lol

I may be a spec, but im a benificial one. You're a virus which is counter-productive to the republic because you cause division with your hostile paranoid zealotry. Elitests who think they are purer-than-thou serve no purpose other than to cause problems. Fortunatly, there aren't many of you and you won't be able to sway the vote.

You don't represent Paul's message. You represent the message of attacking dr. Paul's child and destroying any chance his movement has of succeeding by screaming " Traitor!" Every time Ron Paul's son, or anyone else in the movement makes any progress toward success. You're a panicky bitch who fell apart when we lost the election, and you're to busy trying to blame everyone for your shattered hopes while the rest of us pick up YOUR slack. Whiners like you are a small portion of the liberty movement and we will do just fine without you. Just keep pointing out all the traitors, sell- outs and impostors you see from your bunker while the adults take the country back.

Oh I didn't know he was off limits because he's Dr.Paul's child.. pardon me. See there's another broken link in the chain between myself, a constitutionalists and real Liberty lover and someone like yourself, a false supporter of Liberty and instead buy into the Rand cult of personality.

Liberty is more important than his son. Lil'Rand is gonna have to stand on his own wobbly legs.

its called respect fuckface. Many of us have misgivings and doubts about Rand. Of course no one can be completely sure he's the real deal. However, sensable people choose not to insult and slander the child of a man who has done more for America than any of us ever will. In most cases, we extend him the benifit of the doubt because it makes logical sense. Id like to think a man capable of awaking an entire nation is capable of raising his son with principals. But even some of us who don't trust him are at least reserved in the way they speak of him for respect for his father's contribution and in knoweldge that he hears dipshits like you bashing Rand.

But then, I wouldn't expect you to attempt thinking before you say the stupid shit you're so fond of ejecting from your pie hole. Case in point; you know nothing about me... yet you make all these dumbass accusations. First im lying. Then im not, but im a glory chaser... oh wait, there's no glory in being a PCO, next im power-hungry, only im not in a position of power... so I must be a neocon plant... right. So now I must not actually love liberty... except the campaign is over and ive done x50 what you ever will in your miserable life for this cause. Now im in a cult of personality over Rand simply because I have the fucking tact to not sling insults at my hero's child? Everything you say is a wild accusation based off whatever pops into your tiny head next. Who the hell would ever listen to anything you have to say? There is no possible way in which I could see you swaying anyone toward the cause. What use are you? Can you do anything other than troll the forum like a douche and act like you're the guru of liberty? The others are right, some of you trolls really are content to net 2% of the vote from here until they throw your dumb ass into a camp.

If there are Romney trolls on these boards, it would be a hostile dipshit like you trying to cause division. Those who embrace liberty tend to have respect for each other. Every time I meet a fellow Paul supporter, we are instant pals. But I guess even in the liberty movement there are pompus, self-important morons who think they are better than everyone else. Good job standing among the only "real" libertarians on the Daily Paul. Im sure the ten of you will make big waves.

"its called respect fuckface. Many of us have misgivings and doubts about Rand. Of course no one can be completely sure he's the real deal. However, sensable people choose not to insult and slander the child of a man who has done more for America than any of us ever will. In most cases, we extend him the benifit of the doubt because it makes logical sense. Id like to think a man capable of awaking an entire nation is capable of raising his son with principals. But even some of us who don't trust him are at least reserved in the way they speak of him for respect for his father's contribution and in knoweldge that he hears dipshits like you bashing Rand."

It's called irresponsible, douche canoe. I don't give benefit of the doubt.. If I have doubt, I make the logical decision NOT to back. That's the sensible thing to do. At the very least, you should keep those asskissers closed till you've made up your mind because you're defending a guy that you have doubt in.. That makes no sense unless you're some kind of retard.

See I have NO DOUBT now.. Rand is not above my threshold for Liberty. I'll back people like Dr.Paul, Nap and Woods because they have proven themselves for Liberty. I won't back the son of someone because they happen to have the same genetics and I sure as hell won't give him any slack. I would do the same thing to any of those people that I did with GJ and now Rand. If Dr.Paul should ever go the other way, he'll get the same thing.. Why? Because it's the message asswipe and if they don't tow it.. They are out..

Sanctions are unforgivable especially now that they've pushed for harder ones.. People like you don't give a rats ass if anyone suffers at the hand of Rand just as long as you can keep your "hero".. I don't hero worship and it's another crack in the character of a man that does worship another man. Right now, I'm seeing more cracks in your character than 20 Liberty Bells.

Oh and x50? LOL yeah nothing grandiose or glory seeking about that statement.

Can you see why I'd be frightened to be even remotely associated with you publicly or in any political sphere? You'd be a 24/7 Dean Scream. Voters would run from you so fast you'd think they were giving away free T-Shirts in the opposing party.

Just face it, you're more comfortable attempting to incite violent riots than you are having rational discussion. Emotion and ideological rage are way more attractive to you than discussion about actual issues.

1. You never really supported Dr.Paul's message.
2. You're a coward who would rather schmooze your way to the top than tell the truth and call people what they are.

"Voters would run from you so fast you'd think they were giving away free T-Shirts in the opposing party."

The only voters that might run away would be those that are busy capitulating.. to them, any message that doesn't require a good ass kissing to get moved forward, just chaps their lips. They like the taste of crap in the morning I suppose as long as it's sugar coated.

"Just face it, you're more comfortable attempting to incite violent riots than you are having rational discussion. Emotion and ideological rage are way more attractive to you than discussion about actual issues."

I'm dead against violence unless it's needed. As of a week ago, I made the remark, that I didn't see a need for it anymore and as long as things keep progressing, I'm still of that mind.

As for discussing ideological issues.. you have none. There is no need for discussing.. Get on board or get out of the way.

1. You never really supported Dr.Paul's message.
2. You're a coward who would rather schmooze your way to the top than tell the truth and call people what they are.

Do you even have any idea how to advance his message? Do you understand that presentation effects perception and viability of a message? Have you ever taken a sales course in your life?

Heck, did your parents ever involve manners in the discussion?

Lets address #1 first. I found out about Dr. Paul from the Libertarian side of things. He was probably the only person who gave me even a smidgen of hope that we'd ever change anything in this country. As to tenure, it's looking like I have 4 years on you or so, so lets give up the high horsed "only people who agree with me are supporters" BS sometime soon.

#2 one of the things I most respect about Dr. Paul is his tact and presentation of ideas. You can look up tact later, if you need it defined. His ability to speak and disagree, without vilifying the person he was disagreeing with is incredibly rare. For an example of the opposite, see this board the silly name calling whenever an opponent is brought up. Or see TheBlaze or RedState and look at the misspellings of Obama's name, such as "Obombya" and "Barry" or other such absurdities. This is the antithesis of rational discussion or debate. Honestly, it's just tacky and shows a complete lack of intelligence on the poster's part. If he or she can't even insult a guy properly, what hope is there for a person?

The point is that you have to learn to persuade and influence people. There is a difference between showing someone how to build a house and hitting them over the head with a 2 x 4 and hoping they pick the rest up through osmosis. When someone is wrong, you can either correct them publicly and shame them or you can have a private talk with them and explain why you think they're wrong. One maintains dignity for all of the parties, the other makes the person defensive and generally only serves the ego of the person doing the calling out. If you have a sore shoulder from all that back patting, this may be the cause for you.

The only voters that might run away would be those that are busy capitulating.. to them, any message that doesn't require a good ass kissing to get moved forward, just chaps their lips. They like the taste of crap in the morning I suppose as long as it's sugar coated.

I'm not sure what the deal is with you and butts and lips and metaphors, but it's getting a bit awkward to read.

The voters that will run away are the ones who don't like to be bludgeoned with scary new ideas they don't really understand or that come from a guy they don't like. You might know them as 90% of the voting population. If you can't shake hands and smile at someone you disagree with without calling them names, you're going to spend your short political career wondering why you never got anywhere and then justifying your failure as proof of your purity. Man if that doesn't sound like a never-ending cycle...

I'm dead against violence unless it's needed. As of a week ago, I made the remark, that I didn't see a need for it anymore and as long as things keep progressing, I'm still of that mind.

As you seem to have missed the gist there, I was speaking of the emotion required to incite riot, whether in physical form in the streets or of the metaphorical sort on message boards or through communication. Appealing to emotion is the same in either format, and the results are still similar. In the streets we have the destruction of physical property, and in the world of ideas we have people taking leave of logic and getting caught up in the feelings of it all. That's where ideas die.

As for discussing ideological issues.. you have none. There is no need for discussing.. Get on board or get out of the way.

Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its owner, site moderators or Ron Paul. This site may contain adult language and adult concepts. If you are offended by such content, or feel you may be offended by such content, point your browser to a different site immediately. For more, read the Full Disclaimer